Subject: Question about the Site-local Unicast Address in IPv6

From: lidefeng <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 11:22:20 +0800

Hi, all,

There are many kinds of unicast address in IPv6, one of them is "site-local
address", and it is designed for the address assignment
 in a single site. and you know, there is a concept of "site" in BGP/MPLS
VPN too, could anyone please tell me if there is any difference between
them, or are they the same meaning?

TIA and Best Regards

Defeng Li

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Felipe Alfaro Solana <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 17:17:18 +0200

> them, or are they the same meaning?

I wouldn't bother much with site-local addresses are they are in the
process of being deprecated. Instead, use Unique Local IPv6 Unicast
Addresses as described in

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipv6-unique-local-addr-03.txt

---

From: Brian Haberman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 07:48:24 -0500

The ambiguous site-local addresses are being deprecated.  Please see
draft-ietf-ipv6-deprecate-site-local-03.txt.

The definition of a site is intentionally ambiguous.  That is, an
operator can define the IPv6 site to be the same as or different
from the VPN site.

Regards,
Brian

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 08:45:16 +0300 (EEST)

> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipv6-unique-local-addr-03.txt

Instead, I'd recommend not using local addressing at all.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings